tl;dr below
Start combat roll initiative and you win. You are 20 ft apart and both have 30ft movement. You ready action: attack if attacked and then 5 foot step. Is this legal? Assuming it is what then happens to the enemy's turn? Is it basically over since all they have left is a move action? Your initiative becomes just ahead of theirs so this tactic can be run endlessly (assuming its a legal combination of things to do) or until the enemy does something different like use a ranged weapon. Also, how would reach weapons affect this?
if you ready an action to 5 foot step when a melee attacked gets next to you does that ruin their turn?
Perfectly legal, but...
You can take a 5-foot step before, during, or after your other actions in the round.
So the opponent 5-foot steps during their attack action and still hits you.
Perfectly legal, but...
You can take a 5-foot step before, during, or after your other actions in the round.So the opponent 5-foot steps during their attack action and still hits you.
What if you ready the 5 foot step with no attack to take the 5 foot step when they approach? Lets assume the combat starts with you being 20 feet apart and you both have 30ft movement. I suppose I should have added that in the initial question I'll edit it to reflect that
Technically it's legal (although some GMs may rule that the attacker can continue their move after your readied action goes off, which is probably not RAW.) I explored this idea in this thread, which essentially came to the conclusion that it will only work to avoid one or two attacks.
It seems like the actual play would go like this (starting with Defender and Attacker 20 ft. apart):
1) Defender readies an attack.
2) Attacker moves and tries to attack.
3) Defender hits Attacker, moves back.
4) Attacker takes a move action to move 5 feet, adjacent to Defender.
5) Defender (now adjacent to Attacker) readies an attack.
6) Attacker tries to full attack.
7) Defender hit Attacker, moves back.
8) Attacker, as part of his full attack, takes a 5-foot-step to move adjacent to defender, and then gets all of his attacks.
I don't see any way for Defender to both make his attack and avoid getting full-attacked.
(If the attacker double-moved or charged, he can't do step 4, so you could possibly do the trick twice instead of just once.)
yes you can ready an action to hit them when they are going to hit you and then 5ft step back, now you're out of reach and they miss you.
Technically it's legal (although some GMs may rule that the attacker can continue their move after your readied action goes off, which is probably not RAW.) I explored this idea in this thread, which essentially came to the conclusion that it will only work to avoid one or two attacks.
It seems like the actual play would go like this (starting with Defender and Attacker 20 ft. apart):
1) Defender readies an attack.
2) Attacker moves and tries to attack.
3) Defender hits Attacker, moves back.
4) Attacker takes a move action to move 5 feet, adjacent to Defender.
5) Defender (now adjacent to Attacker) readies an attack.
6) Attacker tries to full attack.
7) Defender hit Attacker, moves back.
8) Attacker, as part of his full attack, takes a 5-foot-step to move adjacent to defender, and then gets all of his attacks.
I don't see any way for Defender to both make his attack and avoid getting full-attacked.
(If the attacker double-moved or charged, he can't do step 4, so you could possibly do the trick twice instead of just once.)
step 4 doesn't work ever, you've already use a move action to move to them and a standard action to attack them, you have no actions left to do the move action you propose for step 4.
Technically it's legal (although some GMs may rule that the attacker can continue their move after your readied action goes off, which is probably not RAW.) I explored this idea in this thread, which essentially came to the conclusion that it will only work to avoid one or two attacks.
It seems like the actual play would go like this (starting with Defender and Attacker 20 ft. apart):
1) Defender readies an attack.
2) Attacker moves and tries to attack.
3) Defender hits Attacker, moves back.
4) Attacker takes a move action to move 5 feet, adjacent to Defender.
5) Defender (now adjacent to Attacker) readies an attack.
6) Attacker tries to full attack.
7) Defender hit Attacker, moves back.
8) Attacker, as part of his full attack, takes a 5-foot-step to move adjacent to defender, and then gets all of his attacks.
I don't see any way for Defender to both make his attack and avoid getting full-attacked.
(If the attacker double-moved or charged, he can't do step 4, so you could possibly do the trick twice instead of just once.)
That looks pretty legit. Thanks.
step 4 doesn't work ever, you've already use a move action to move to them and a standard action to attack them, you have no actions left to do the move action you propose for step 4.Technically it's legal (although some GMs may rule that the attacker can continue their move after your readied action goes off, which is probably not RAW.) I explored this idea in this thread, which essentially came to the conclusion that it will only work to avoid one or two attacks.
It seems like the actual play would go like this (starting with Defender and Attacker 20 ft. apart):
1) Defender readies an attack.
2) Attacker moves and tries to attack.
3) Defender hits Attacker, moves back.
4) Attacker takes a move action to move 5 feet, adjacent to Defender.
5) Defender (now adjacent to Attacker) readies an attack.
6) Attacker tries to full attack.
7) Defender hit Attacker, moves back.
8) Attacker, as part of his full attack, takes a 5-foot-step to move adjacent to defender, and then gets all of his attacks.
I don't see any way for Defender to both make his attack and avoid getting full-attacked.
(If the attacker double-moved or charged, he can't do step 4, so you could possibly do the trick twice instead of just once.)
You never actually used the attack action. The readied action rules state "Assuming he is still capable of doing so, he continues his actions once you complete your readied action." In this case, they are not still capable of attacking, so instead of continuing to attempt an attack action with no target, they now have a standard action to do as they please.
You never actually used the attack action. The readied action rules state "Assuming he is still capable of doing so, he continues his actions once you complete your readied action." In this case, they are not still capable of attacking, so instead of continuing to attempt an attack action with no target, they now have a standard action to do as they please.
See you say the thing and then make something up. Since they are not capable of doing they can't continue their actions. because if they can they do, so that means if they can't they don't. Because if they didn't attack, then your readied action never went off. If your readied action went off, then they already are attacking and have used their action.
RumpinRufus is correct. "Assuming he is still capable of doing so, he continues his actions once you complete your readied action." If a caster tried to target you with an on-target spell, and then your readied action was to run around the corner (breaking line of sight and line of effect), the caster can no longer use his on target spell, which means he no longer continues his action that you interrupted and can do as he pleases.
The attacker *is* still capable of attacking. Just not hitting, since the space he hits now only contains air.
It makes sense even from a non-mechanic perspective: you get close to attack, and the moment you open I lash back at you and move away, your sword concludes its swing in the air.
RAW it's not a loophole, but a tactic that decides the winner or generates a stall. Given enough room, if a character starts using that strategy over and over, the foe will never hit him while getting bashed. Unless he has other options to pick (such as ranged attacks) or understands and refrains from attacking, creating the stall.
The character who started it first, as long as he continues, will always act first, so if the foe keeps coming close to attack, he'll eventually die.
This is a problem, for me, since it turns the mechanics into "who hops back is always at advantage" while reality is pretty much the opposite.
"You can take a 5-foot step as part of your readied action, but only if you don't otherwise move any distance during the round."
And this is what brings it and should be fixed in some way. But as it's written now, it's very clear and legal.
The attacker *is* still capable of attacking. Just not hitting, since the space he hits now only contains air.
It makes sense even from a non-mechanic perspective: you get close to attack, and the moment you open I lash back at you and move away, your sword concludes its swing in the air.
The only problem is that according to the rules, the readied action occurs first. So instead of attacking and moving back when they are mid-swing, you might be attacking and moving back when you see they are about to swing. Since they haven't actually swung yet, they could easily decide not to swing and move forward after you instead.
At least that's my and seemingly many others' interpretation. I honestly don't think the rules are clear enough in regards to whether you lose the action if you can't complete it, or whether you can change your action, so I'm not going to act like one interpretation is more valid than the other.
I think that's a valid interpretation Astral Wanderer, if a little harsh. I wouldn't rule that way in my games, but I can understand it. As you say, it allows for some exploiting.
You never actually used the attack action. The readied action rules state "Assuming he is still capable of doing so, he continues his actions once you complete your readied action." In this case, they are not still capable of attacking, so instead of continuing to attempt an attack action with no target, they now have a standard action to do as they please.
Given that this concept gets discussed in EVERY thread on readied actions, I've put up a FAQ candidate for it.
I've always favored the interpretation that didn't get wonky and too mired in mechanics. If you ready an attack and to 5ft step when someone moves to you, you get an attack and 5ft step, and the attacker continues his movement and attacks you anyways.
Other results are in my opinion a ludicrous abuse of readied actions and the weird mechanics of how turn based games work.
It's just looking at it like Astral Wanderer said, as they are beginning their swing you hit them and back off, causing them to miss. The idea that you can take back your action, and change your previous action seems to me as ludicrous cheating and weird mechanics of turn based games.
I've always favored the interpretation that didn't get wonky and too mired in mechanics. If you ready an attack and to 5ft step when someone moves to you, you get an attack and 5ft step, and the attacker continues his movement and attacks you anyways.
Other results are in my opinion a ludicrous abuse of readied actions and the weird mechanics of how turn based games work.
This. Theme and fun over rigid mechanics.
I favor the interpretation that doesn't require time travel and is practical at the gaming table.
I favor the interpretation that doesn't require time travel and is practical at the gaming table.
that'd be the one where they lose their action and don't get to do a different action right?
Nope. Also, I don't care to have the same conversation is two separate threads.
Imagine this.
A: I ready an action to disarm if B attacks me.
B: I attack A.
A: I interrupt B, disarming him (rolls dice) successfully.
At this point is where we differ.
My Interpretation
B: Oh, in that case I draw my backup weapon.
Your Interpretation
B: Well that cancels my action, now it's lost and I can't do anything else.
I believe my interpretation is correct because it prevents you from canceling part of the timeline by using very questionable rules interpretations. I won't be so bold as to say my interpretation is absolutely RAW or that yours absolutely isn't, but I think mine is far more balanced and reasonable in its practicality.
Nope. Also, I don't care to have the same conversation is two separate threads.
answered in other thread
So instead of attacking and moving back when they are mid-swing, you might be attacking and moving back when you see they are about to swing. Since they haven't actually swung yet, they could easily decide not to swing and move forward after you instead.
When you see that the foe is about to swing, he is already mid-swing. Or a quarter-swing, or whatever, but anyway enough for you to discern that he's attacking. Unless you see the future, you're seeing him starting to perform his action, and once started, it's done. Even if it's not completed, it's lost. There's nothing in the rules such as "if you're doing an action that gets interrupted, you get your action back". Besides, if the action wasn't started, it wouldn't trigger your readied action.
Not started = action still free to expend.Started + made irrelevant = action lost.
Further, getting the action back would mean that you can always get it back, not just when the target of your attack isn't there anymore. So you could always change your strategy, thus defeating the purpose of readied actions: "you have this strategy, I am ready to counter it"; if you add "but then you can change it", it's pointless.
For me it needs an errata, but not because it's unclear; rather, because it causes situations such as the get-bashed-to-death or stall as described above. Yeah, in actual play it's unlikely it would go on for more than one round, given lack of space, other creatures in the combat, and everything, but it can happen (especially in things like arena fights, duels, and such) and it may be abused.
It's an abuse of a vagueness in a rule that needs to be flexible in order to cover a range of circumstances. As said it has been discussed in the other thread. Using an immediate 5ft step to invalidate and entire rounds actions is unreasonable.
Guy begins to swing, you react your initiative now going right before theirs with a ready and swing at them then 5 ft back. They complete what they were just doing, which would just miss, and then do whatever legal things are available with the actions they have.
The guy can't 5 ft during their swing, but would have to wait until the swing is done regardless if it's a standard action to attack, or a full round action.
How can you ready a 5ft step?
Readying an Action: You can ready a standard action, a move action, a swift action, or a free action.
5ft step counts as 'no action' respective 'miscellaneous action'. I couldn't find a rule how it could be integrated into a standard action attack, but perhaps I missed something...
You don't ready the 5ft step but you can take one with your readied action if you haven't moved or taken one already.
My point is that the defending person gets to take a move equivalent action, ready their attack, attack and take a five foot step and it leaves the attacker unable to do anything If they have moved 5ft. It leads to the silly situation where a charging person can't reach the defender even though they have plenty of movement.
A FAQ has been requested because those arguing for this absurdity are using a vague interpretation of the rules, based on the assumption that despite the action not having happened yet it still counts as having happened - despite no specific rules to that effect.
We will just have to wait for the FAQ requested on the other thread.
it leaves the attacker unable to do anything If they have moved 5ft.
I feel the wording of this is you believing that the attacker can 5 ft step and continue his original attack. If so, they cannot.
I would love if this stuff would be better addressed myself, because I've had to argue with a lot of people who refuse to acknowledge the rules as written for readied action.
Ah, thanks at The Sword and Avoron.
We've kind of covered it in the other thread which has the FAQ but essentially I am saying there are two arguments.
Some people suggest...
Kobald and 20th level fighter 20 feet apart.
1. Kobald readies attack for when the fighter attack
2. Fighter takes a move forward 20ft and starts to attack
3. Kobald takes his attack and then steps back 5ft
4. Fighter has started to attack but kobald isn't in range so attack fails. As fighter has moved now can't take a 5 ft step.
5. Kobald readies an action to attack when fighter attacks
6. Fighter takes a five foot step forward and starts a full attack
7. Kobald attacks and steps back 5ft
8. Fighter loses his first attack but is free to make iterative attacks. However can't move as has already taken a five foot step - has to shoot the kobald with a bow or attack with reach weapon.
This ruling relies on the idea that despite the readied action happening before the triggering action the triggering action has still happened. It allows a single C/R 1/4 to stop any creature without reach simply by readying an attack that it still gets to make!
I take the other interpretation that as the kobald's readied action interrupts the normal running order and the fighter "continues to take this actions" that the readied action occurs before the attack action and the fighter can then chose what to do. In this case
1. Kobald readies attack for when the fighter attacks
2. Fighter moves 20ft forward and before he can attack
3. Kobald attacks and steps back 5ft
4. Fighter moves another 5ft forward and makes a standard attack.
Anyway we are going round in circles here and as stated already this is duplicating a similar thread that happened at exactly the same time. FAQ needed.
Oddly enough, the best counter might be to walk up next to the enemy and not attack. =/
Oddly enough, the best counter might be to walk up next to the enemy and not attack. =/
That's what I'm afraid of - very Month Python. Has no one written an order of the stick cartoon about this yet?
oh wow, a severely outmatched opponent is opting to use a tactic and strategy to delay it's doom. One which relies on correctly guessing what the enemy will do and really only succeeds against opponents that will try the same thing over and over if it's not working instead of trying something else.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
oh wow, a severely outmatched opponent is opting to use a tactic and strategy to delay it's doom. One which relies on correctly guessing what the enemy will do and really only succeeds against opponents that will try the same thing over and over if it's not working instead of trying something else.
[snark]Well yeah, this is probably being done against a martial. What are they going to do? Not hit things[/snark]